RealGM

Pretty balanced take, and hard to disagree with anything they really said.

I like the comment about how the Raptors have "a real NBA team" which helps them evaluate their players better

ishoy123 wrote:Pretty balanced take, and hard to disagree with anything they really said.

I like the comment about how the Raptors have "a real NBA team" which helps them evaluate their players better

It's a good point because the Raps will be able to properly evaluate what they have, specifically guys like Barnes, IQ, Barrett, Dick. They might end up deciding Barnes ain't that guy, or maybe Barnes is that guy but IQ, Barrett, Dick aren't a good supporting cast and they need to take a more drastic approach to the roster. Or, maybe the exceed expectations and this roster is good enough to build from. We should have a pretty good idea what they are after 30-40 games.

A big problem with a team like DET is that they are so bad and so far away from being good, it's incredibly difficult to determine just how good (or bad) their young guys are. Whose worth building around? Whose worth giving big money to? Who really knows when you lose every game by 20.

OakleyDokely wrote:

ishoy123 wrote:Pretty balanced take, and hard to disagree with anything they really said.

I like the comment about how the Raptors have "a real NBA team" which helps them evaluate their players better

It's a good point because the Raps will be able to properly evaluate what they have, specifically guys like Barnes, IQ, Barrett, Dick. They might end up deciding Barnes ain't that guy, or maybe Barnes is that guy but IQ, Barrett, Dick aren't a good supporting cast and they need to take a more drastic approach to the roster. Or, maybe the exceed expectations and this roster is good enough to build from. We should have a pretty good idea what they are after 30-40 games.

A big problem with a team like DET is that they are so bad and so far away from being good, it's incredibly difficult to determine just how good (or bad) their young guys are. Whose worth building around? Whose worth giving big money to? Who really knows when you lose every game by 20.

Especially when you committed over 200 million to Cade and nobody has any idea if he is even close to that type of player. There is no evaluation when you have the current state of a team like detroit.

WuTang_OG wrote:

OakleyDokely wrote:

ishoy123 wrote:Pretty balanced take, and hard to disagree with anything they really said.

I like the comment about how the Raptors have "a real NBA team" which helps them evaluate their players better

It's a good point because the Raps will be able to properly evaluate what they have, specifically guys like Barnes, IQ, Barrett, Dick. They might end up deciding Barnes ain't that guy, or maybe Barnes is that guy but IQ, Barrett, Dick aren't a good supporting cast and they need to take a more drastic approach to the roster. Or, maybe the exceed expectations and this roster is good enough to build from. We should have a pretty good idea what they are after 30-40 games.

A big problem with a team like DET is that they are so bad and so far away from being good, it's incredibly difficult to determine just how good (or bad) their young guys are. Whose worth building around? Whose worth giving big money to? Who really knows when you lose every game by 20.

Especially when you committed over 200 million to Cade and nobody has any idea if he is even close to that type of player. There is no evaluation when you have the current state of a team like detroit.

And they're going to have to make big money decisions on guys like Ivey and Duren soon.

Interesting how Partnow is higher on Barnes than Banchero. Based on his Tiers list in the past, for sure i thought he would be lower on Barnes compared to Lowe

LOL, I discussed on the GB that Barnes and Banchero were fairly close in terms of impact and that was closer comp than Wagner/Barnes.

I got blasted.

The entire Banchero/Barnes debate hinges on whether you think Banchero is a legit #1 guy on a contender. If you think he's that guy, you take him over Barnes. But if you believe Banchero is more of a 2/3 guy, I'd take Barnes, because in that role, I think Barnes gives you more at both ends overall.

OakleyDokely wrote:The entire Banchero/Barnes debate hinges on whether you think Banchero is a legit #1 guy on a contender. If you think he's that guy, you take him over Barnes. But if you believe Banchero is more of a 2/3 guy, I'd take Barnes, because in that role, I think Barnes gives you more at both ends overall.

yeah I personally think Banchero is a #2 and Wagner is a #3.

Duffman100 wrote:

OakleyDokely wrote:The entire Banchero/Barnes debate hinges on whether you think Banchero is a legit #1 guy on a contender. If you think he's that guy, you take him over Barnes. But if you believe Banchero is more of a 2/3 guy, I'd take Barnes, because in that role, I think Barnes gives you more at both ends overall.

yeah I personally think Banchero is a #2 and Wagner is a #3.

Both Weltman and Masai see the world the same way. I don't think they care if Banchero or Barnes are #2 ceiling guys. I mean ya in a perfect world they would want them to be true #1's but we all know it's very very hard to find a true # 1, all nba first team.

Their whole philosophy is to develop enough talent on their roster and consolidate

Barnes has the tools to be a super elite defender so hopefully he maximizes his talent on that end, even if he’s a number 2 guy long term.

Barnes showed a pretty great mid range game. If he takes steps forward there he could be a number 1 option. His biggest problem is being passive for most of the game.

Quickely, Barrett, and Dick are terrible on defense. The only player we will be keeping is IQ. I would guess we raise the values of Barrett and Dick then ship them out to balance our roster. We don't have a reliable high end big prospect.

The defensive concerns make me think starting Dick is a bad idea. We might be better off with some form of a 2 PG line up.

Poeltl / Olynyk
Barnes
Barrett / Brown
Mitchell / Dick
Quickely / Shead

Being young and bad on defense leads to culture issues. We should be aiming for a top 20 defense this upcoming season, it's a realistic goal. Another point is its easier to improve on offense than to improve on defense.

Has there ever been a player who went from bad on defense to an all defensive player?

I'm so glad that Pelton skipped us last episode so we can get a full 30 mins of the Raptors from Lowe. For those that didn't listen to last episode, it wasn't a slight by Pelton; he skipped us because he said he doesn't think we're a "WTF are they doing" team and he thinks the direction is more clear than the others.

The answer to all the questions they were asking comes down to what Lowe said towards the end: "their FO genuinely believes Scottie Barnes can become a top 10ish player in the league." Every move this FO has made since deciding to pivot has been to
1) build the environment Barnes needs - both in terms of style of play and culture
2) bring in players that complement him and the style - a rim protecting C to allow him to roam, shooters, a scoring guard that can play off-ball, POA defenders to keep him off smaller guards, etc.
3) cap moves that allow them flexibility to bring salary in sooner than later if Barnes is ready

We are a bet on Scottie Barnes, and the way the team is constructed is to allow them to accelerate to compete if he's ready or sit back if he's not.

Also, thankfully someone went on the record to say Scottie v Banchero is a lot closer than the rest of the NBA community wants to pretend.

Thaddy wrote:
Has there ever been a player who went from bad on defense to an all defensive player?

Brook lopez

WuTang_OG wrote:

Duffman100 wrote:

OakleyDokely wrote:The entire Banchero/Barnes debate hinges on whether you think Banchero is a legit #1 guy on a contender. If you think he's that guy, you take him over Barnes. But if you believe Banchero is more of a 2/3 guy, I'd take Barnes, because in that role, I think Barnes gives you more at both ends overall.

yeah I personally think Banchero is a #2 and Wagner is a #3.

Both Weltman and Masai see the world the same way. I don't think they care if Banchero or Barnes are #2 ceiling guys. I mean ya in a perfect world they would want that but we all know it's very very hard to find a true # 1, all nba first team.

Their whole philosophy is to develop enough talent on their roster and consolidate

Both Banchero and Barnes are #2 ceiling, and it may come down to defense. Barnes is projected to be a better defender, but his inability to turn his hip against quicker guard, doesn't feel he is a level above Banchero, as the concern of Banchero is his limitation as a non-switchable defender. And do we think Banchero ceiling is better than Siakam?

As for consolidating assets, sadly, I have yet to see us selling high, but we buying high. Trent didn't get trade earlier, and we trade for Poeltl for picks. It feels we are giving a bit too much for the evaluation.

Indeed wrote:. And do we think Banchero ceiling is better than Siakam?

Yes I do. His ability to score at a younger age is much more advanced.

Said nothing.

Indeed wrote:

WuTang_OG wrote:

Duffman100 wrote:
yeah I personally think Banchero is a #2 and Wagner is a #3.

Both Weltman and Masai see the world the same way. I don't think they care if Banchero or Barnes are #2 ceiling guys. I mean ya in a perfect world they would want that but we all know it's very very hard to find a true # 1, all nba first team.

Their whole philosophy is to develop enough talent on their roster and consolidate

Both Banchero and Barnes are #2 ceiling, and it may come down to defense. Barnes is projected to be a better defender, but his inability to turn his hip against quicker guard, doesn't feel he is a level above Banchero, as the concern of Banchero is his limitation as a non-switchable defender. And do we think Banchero ceiling is better than Siakam?

As for consolidating assets, sadly, I have yet to see us selling high, but we buying high. Trent didn't get trade earlier, and we trade for Poeltl for picks. It feels we are giving a bit too much for the evaluation.

Raps are no where near selling and consolidating. Im speaking to what they did with kawhi and gasol.

Thaddy wrote:Has there ever been a player who went from bad on defense to an all defensive player?

Brook Lopez if I’m not mistaken?